[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> michael: it has been an emotional tragic, and very taxing week on all of us, and what we have for you today is breaking news about what happened in boston, what happened in texas and of course we're going to bring you live--we're going to talk to about what happened with the gun bill as well. we have a great show for you. i'm michael shure, and you're in the war room. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> michael: we have breaking news coming out of botch today. as you know today was the day when the fbi was going to have a press conference. they just had that press conference, and we now have

photos of the bombing suspect-- suspect--two bombing suspects in boston. they've been photographed, they've been videoed. the video coming from lord & taylor from across the street. they have done a remarkable job piecing together these images and these videos. here is a little bit with what they say today at this press conference, which concluded just a little while ago. >> identifying and locating those responsible is now our highest priority. no other details will be released at this time because this is our focus now. >> michael: and it appears that it is the focus of everyone in the country, and actually the world. it's time now to look at these pictures contact law enforcement, contact fbi and let them know if you know anything, if you know someone who knows this person. someone who looks like this person. someone you may work with, someone you may have gone to school with, now is the time to do that. today the president and first lady came and brought their

condolences to the entire city of boston, not just the families, but kind of there to bring condolences and to lift the spirits of that beleaguered city. >> the face of those who would bring death upon innocence, we will choose to comfort and to heal. >> we may be momentarily knocked off our feet, but we'll pick ourselves up. we'll keep going. we will finish the race. >> michael: and now from an emotional and eventful day in boston to the fallout of yesterday's emotional day on capitol hill. last night's shameable vote in the senate, the president made it clear how disappointed he was. he met with the very senators

who voted against the laws. they had told those senators about their children's horrific last moments, still the senators refused to help. gabby giffords was there and she had also spoken with those same senators about being shot point blank in the head. but they still could not muster the courage to take action. in a scathing op-ed in "the new york times" giffords wrote that she was furious and quote, senators say they fear the nra and the gun lobby but i think that fear must be nothing compared to the fear that the first graders at sandy hook elementary school felt as their lives ended in a hail of bullet. i was elected six times to serve in the state legislature and then this i don't congress. i know what a complicated issue it is. senator from alaska voted against it and then released a statement saying it's dangerous to do any type of policies in an

emotional moment. everyone's all worked up. that's now enough. yes it is. having 20 slaughtered children is not enough? come on. senator max baucus gave a little more contrite. he gave an one word response against the gun bill, montana. he does have a point. how many guns there are per each state. in the home state of montana with 120 gun businesses for every 100,000 people. next the senator who voted against it with 104 per 100,000. and right behind him heidi hide camp and mark pryor. the senator from louisiana voted for it. and she's up for re-election. there are heroes on the right republicans senator susan

collins mark kirk, putt toomey and john mccain all voted for it. afterwards mccain showed no sympathy for his colleagues who had been cowed by the nr. >> i can't blame any interest group for votes. people who are responsible. drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think that there is any chance we'll see this president even say the words "carbon tax"? >> with an open mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned "great leadership" so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter). >> watch the show. >> only on current tv.

[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> michael: let's go behind the lines now and look inside republican senator michigan mcconnell's victory laugh over the background checks gun amendment failing. the simple idea of extending background checks to gun shows and internet purchases seemed so easy to do. but check out what his campaign posted on its facebook page last night. it's with captions asking how

much begun control he can. can we have this much begun control? giving a confirmed node and yada and yada with reid looking defeated. it was supported by the kentucky senator. what has got apple's ire is that it encourages the mocking for the calls of gun legislation. those calls have been louder since the killings in aurora and sandy hook. facebookers who quick to leave comments and protests. this is why i quit the republican party. 90% wanted this bill but you only care about the money. you disgust me. the republican senator had a ton of support for the post. by the afternoon 5,000 people liked the image. cherish this moment, mcconnell, but think of what all this gloating will get you when voters remember what you think of 90% of them.

now to take us behind the lines behind the republican victory lap, jack burke man. he joins us from washington, d.c. welcome inside "the war room"." >> many thanks my friend, pleasure. >> michael: we do have a good time. we're from different points of view here but do you think it's wise for mitch mcconnell who is up for re-election next year to be rubbing it in 90% of americans face. >> why do i oppose the background checks. i'll go further. because i want an armed citizenry. i think that's what the founders had in mind. one thing that surprises me about you guys. i never understood why the left--why does the left oppose guns? why is this an issue for conservative? when authoritarian and totalitarian governments take over you know one of the first things they do is collect up the

guns. that's what hitler did stalin did. i never understand why you guys are--you guys fight this. you should be supporting this. it's more of a liberal issue. >> we're not fighting it. we're trimming this. if they were going to take my cue on this. it would be a whole lot more drastic than what they're flirting with right now. i thought they were soft peddling this idea. i want this assault weapons guns gone. >> why? >> michael: because they serve no purpose in our society. >> you're wrong. >> michael: you asked a question, let me arena your question. they do not augment the second amendment one bit. the second amendment stands. it's strong. you see people defending it constantly. but when you have all the weaponses bans and you have rapid fire magazines it does nothing for the second amendment. they scare people. they're military-grade weapons and we do not need them. when we say common sense. it's not everything that i want,

it's meeting halfway. and you just refuse to do that. >> i heard you. two things well argued, but two things, number one imagine if you had an event in the united states that was far wars than 9/11. imagine something five times as bad. imagine if you had no police protection where you live for a week. wouldn't you want an automatic weapon to defend your family? you don't want to defend them with a .38. you better believe i want an m-16. the other reason why you need automatic weapons and a lot of them in the society is i don't want--what if a totalitarian guy gets started or a totalitarian government comes to power. why is it that the central government, and this is the issue for liberals. why do you want washington to have a monopoly on arms and force. liberals should fight that. >> michael: it's not just liberals that should fight that. everybody should fight that. we fight that ideologically

yes, you can paint those scenarios which i think are unlikely. it doesn't matter whether i which they're likely or unlikely to happen, you're talking about it in a hypothetical way. but we cannot continue legislating to the exception. yes, when the exception comes up he can cross that bridge and there will be problems as 9/11, and there were when there was a hurricane in the southern parts of the united states, louisiana and mississippi. i'm talking about common sense. we don't need these things right now. they've gotten in the wrong hands too many times and they're causing so much grief in this country. i want to move on. >> okay. >> michael: i want you hear rand paul's response to the president's disgust over the filibuster, what i think is a filibuster of the legislation in light of the newtown tragedy. this is rand paul. >> i hate to see it in using people, i think as props and politicizing people's tragedy.

when i see the mothers and fathers and them testifying, and i know they're coming voluntarily, they want to come and be part of the debate, but it saddens me to see them. i think in some cases the president has used them as props, and disappoints me. >> michael: i want to you have equal time, jack. we have both spoken a lot. tell me about the prop. is he out of line? >> no, i think--i think he's right on the money. if anything he tasteful i under states the point. reagan was the first to skillfully use the house gallery in the union. and even reagan and clinton, he used these people as props to an extent and in a way no other president ever used any people as props. boston--he's kind of back and forth. yesterday when he was expressing his bitterness in the senate, he's trying to leverage botch.

he's looking for his opportunity. he's waiting for the liberal pundits to do it before he does it but he's looking to leverage boston in the gun patrol debates. this guy is shameless. he'll do and same anything. >> michael: he's dealing with people--people according to the white house, and according to others who have reached out to the white house themselves. the same people u a subset of that group was taken by the nra to their press conferences as well. this is a national tragedy jack. the president is the head of the nation whether you like it or not. it's not a prop. he's saying, listen, look at what is happening to our families. show us a family who is hurt by it. reagan was a master at doing it. it's what the president is entitled to and does do. was it a prop when george w. bush put his arm around him at the foot of the world trade center. i don't think it was a prop. >> sure it was a prop. but what you will see--you're

right, a lot of that is correct but what's not right and what he shouldn't do is in the next few days you're going to see him skillfully and rhetorically tie boston to gun control. you can watch and test me as prognosticator. >> michael: jack burkeman has the final word. i don't agree with you at all but i do love these conversations. >> a pleasure. many thanks. >> michael: up here in "the war room," in a job done in tough weeks the president would have said this is one of the toughest. no one knows more about pushing through the tough times than laney davis. he'll join us after the break. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

barack obama when the sox, celtics, operators patriots are winning again, the crowd will gather and watch the parade. and this time next year on the third monday on april the world will return to this great american city to run harder than ever and to cheer even louder for the 118th boston marathon. bet on it. >> michael: our president rallying spirits at the memorial for botch bombing victims earlier today. it was a speech that definitely wasn't on the white house agenda on monday. just four days ago the top of the agenda was getting stronger gun background checks in the senate and pushing ahead on the immigration reform. now only terror and political defeat are in the headlines.

joining me from francisco to tell how the white house can get back in the driver seat, lanny davis author of "crystals." based on his experience as special council to president bill clinton during the lewinsky scandal. and lanny davis welcome into the war room. >> thanks, thanks for having me. >> michael: let's get right to the top of the news line. the boston bombings diverted the white house's time, energy and message away from the gun debate. how does it get back on track? should it even get back on track? >> it should, and you can do two things at the same time if you're president you can two three things at the same time. i think the white house message and message of your previous guest who i completely agree with on the merit on the background check is the wrong message. i think rather than talking

about retribution retaliation and anger against these four democrats we ought to be persuading them with a different message which is what my book is about. the message that works is let people vote. you can take a position on the merits. don't attack motives the way most of us in politics tend to--instead of disagreeing we start to attack. that's what i heard your previous guest do. what is wrong here and mark bacchus is a friend of mine who he deeply respect. but i disagree, allow the vote. there are 70 votes in the senate if you stop the filibuster. to vote to prevent a vote we're doing in fact do something i would suggest to my friends is anti-democratic. if this is a framing contest this is a right to get a vote. it's didn't with democratic principles and allow them to disagree on the merits of the bill. >> michael: i don't know if it's

about agreeing. the merits of the bill are clear and the filibuster certainly has to be revisited. yes, i'm encouraged to hear you say the white house can multi task in this way. but this is an emotional issue lanny. >> oh, for sure. >> michael: this is not should we build a road or a highway beautification project in tennessee. these are guns. these are people who die every day. we talk about that on the show all the time. isn't there a difference when there is an emotional issue and the people are bind it, and you're mark prior or max baucus, isn't there an difference in issues like that. >> of course there is a difference when there are high emotions. i disagree with the supreme court that the second amendment was ever about the right to carry assault weapons. it's a 5-4 vote. we have to say it's the law of the land. so is i'm extremely strongly,

emotionally in favor of strict gun control, licensing, regulation, etc. but i don't think we get to our goal post by attacking and then expressing this early political retaliation rather than trying to get to the baucuss and the pryors who are good people who voted wrong and say look, at least you should allow your colleagues the right to vote up or down on this issue. a better way of getting them and opening their minds in what i just heard which was a campaign of retaliation. >> michael: i understand the emotion and what you say makes great sense. i by both you and adam green have made great sense in how you approach it. let's move to your book. you discuss how to get facts out in a crisis. and this was been a week full of crises. take a live of what president obama said in his rose garden address. >> obama: by now it's well-known that 90% of the american people

support the universal background check to make it harder for a dangerous person to buy a gun. we're talking about convicted felons people convicted with domestic violence, people with a mental illness. 90% of people support that idea. >> michael: has he read the lanny davis book? is that the right message. >> i don't know if he has read my book but i would love to believe that. i think he's a great merger and one of the great communicators. i worked for bill clinton and he's pretty good. and barack obama when he's good he's very good. i think he needs to focus and roll up his sleeves and go up and talk to max baucus and mark pryor and heitkamp. but the democrats have been on the wrong side in preventing the right to vote.

a bipartisan group of senators is trying to change that filibuster rule, and now with guns overwhelmingly in favor of background checks we ought to be putting the pressure on changing the rules of the senate that allow 54 senators who are in favor of the right to vote to be blocked by 46 senators not being allowed to vote. if i were advising as a crisis management matter that's the winning message as well as the obvious 80%-90% of the american people support this. >> michael: i hope that combination is the wake-up call on filibuster reform, as you say. we have the gun vote. we have boston, as if they weren't enough there could be as many as 15 dead in the texas fertilizer plant explosion in west texas. the cause is still under investigation. how big of a diversion is a story like this? >> well, it's huge as a

humanitarian matter, whether the president should make a visit which is important to people who lost their lives or their communities-- >> michael: and before we get there who decides that, lanny? who decides if the president should make a visit there? >> when i was at the clinton white house. i was always the recipient of bad news. i was rarely in the pressroom to make a decision but to stop the piranhas in the pressroom who were trying to tear me up. for the president there is a talented young man named dan pfeiffer, and i'm sure the president follows his instincts but i hope this time the president rolls up his sleeves and goes to the hill, and talks to--we need six seven votes here. lyndon johnson would be face to face one inch apart to talk to people. i need your vote. we got the civil rights votes passed in the 60s because lyndon johnson did that.

barack obama is more, let's wait and then we'll jump in. i respect him greatly. i voted for him and i respect him on almost every issue. but i would like to see him engaged on the right to vote up or down, which means that the democrats have to be consistent when it's a republican president who they're trying to thwart. it's interesting that the group that came together to form those filibuster rules were not by democrats who said wait a minute, when we're in the minority, we may want to filibuster. they are inconsistent and lacks credibility when we protest. let's have a right to up and down wrote vote when it's our. >> michael: the book is called " "crisis tales" by lanny davis. thank you for being in the war room today. >> michael: immigration reform

cannot go up in flames the way gun reform did. or can it? we'll tell where you things stand right after this. current tv is the place for true stories. with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines. real, gripping, current. documentaries... on current tv.

>> michael: yesterday was a bad day for getting things done on cap tool hill. gun legislation was killed by a threat of filibuster. now everyone is wondering if the gang of eight's bipartisan immigration bill will have a similar fate. marco rubio tried to stamp out legislation, and rush being rush, he said what is on the minds of the g.o.p. >> so many people are scared to death, senator that the republican party is committing suicide. that we're going to end up legalizing 9 million automatic

democrat vote. >> michael: haven't they already kind of committed suicide? joining me is elise foley who has been covering the immigration bill. welcome in "the war room." >> thank you. >> michael: i hate to say this, but what rush said might border on coherency. >> you know, there are a few things that they worry about. they worry about the bill's legalization and cause a third wave, as they say and make everything worse. then their other fear which i think is cynical and less than positive is that legalize a bunch of people, they'll all become democratic voters and it will hurt their party. that is arguable. people won't become citizens and voters for years and years and maybe they can make their case to them beforehand. but there is credibility worries about the bill and what it will

do politically. >> michael: in 2007 conservatives were so quick to jump all over immigration reform. this time, however, it's a muscle grumbling so far. are the republicans paralyzed by the latino vote? >> i think so, i mean, i think what we saw in the last election was pretty convincing to a lot of people. you saw mitt romney get such a small percentage of the latino vote and polls that showed that latinos were disgusted about what he said that immigrants should self deport. so you definitely see people seem to want to take a step back be a little more quiet about it. if they oppose it, oppose it quietly without the great rhetoric from the past. >> michael: it's a great point having to strike a balance sometimes. marco rubio has been everywhere

on conservative radio in recent weeks talking about immigration. let's listen to another point he made on rush limbaugh's show. >> the second point i would make to you is that i understand that some voices in the republican party are saying we should do immigration reform for political reasons, i'm not one of them. if people think we pass this and tomorrow we go from 28% to 38% or 48% that's just not accurate. >> michael: do you think he will take the reins on this and guide the republican dialogue as this moves forward? >> i think so. they're certainly giving him the responsibility of going out and selling it to conservatives. he has a website up that is basically debunking all the myths that have already started about it. you know you're not seeing that from lindsey graham or john mccain, and neither of them are doing the same amount of appearances. even though they were saying earlier at a press conference this could be call the mccain mccain-schumer bill. it's not the rubio bill, per se.

he is a key part of t but he is taking the role of the chief spokesman of the group to the conservatives. >> michael: how valuable is this bill? what is your sense of what it will look lick by the like by the time it comes down for a vote. >> i think there will be amendments on both sides. it's likely that progressives will include something that like same-sex couples there might be amendments aimed of killing the bill entirely. but i think they vowed to make the bills stay stay at the original vision. they're willing to consider amendments. they're not trying to block all amendments, according to them, but i think they're committed to try to get it over the finish line as close to what it is as they possibly can. >> michael: elise foley, it will make you smarter if you read her in the "huffington post" on this

issue. thank you for joining us in "the war room." coming up next, it's called global warming for a reason. the u.n.'s chief top negotiator for climate change joins us right after this. real immigration reform? >> with a distinctly satirical point of view. if you believe in state's rights but still believe in the drug war you must be high. >> only on current tv. when i first felt the diabetic nerve pain, of course, i had no idea what it was. i felt like my feet were going to sleep. it progressed from there to burning to like a thousand bees that were just stinging my feet. [ female announcer ] it's known that diabetes damages nerves. lyrica is fda approved to treat diabetic nerve pain. lyrica is not for everyone. it may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing rash, hives, blisters, changes in eye sight including blurry vision,

muscle pain with fever tired feeling, or skin sores from diabetes. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, and swelling of hands, legs, and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who've had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. having less pain... it's a wonderful feeling. [ female announcer ] ask your doctor about lyrica today. it's specific treatment for diabetic nerve pain.

>> michael: more than half of the carbon pollution in the atmosphere originates from five countries. the united states russia, japan and india. in the past poorer countries insists that the countries responsible for producing the most greenhouse gasses should take the lead in making changes makes sense. now they say they're ready to

lead the way in cutting greenhouse emissions. we're talking about countries like haiti. and nepal and the democratic republic of congo. although their contribution to climb change is minuscule their willingness to make cuts could shame bigger counties. what needs to happen on a global level to combat climate change. with us is the u.n.'s top negotiateor on climate change and she joins us tonight. thank you. >> thank you for the invitation. >> michael: it's such an interesting topic. what is the u.n. doing to push for an international agreement to stall global warming now.

>> right now as we speak all governments around the world are preparing for the next round of conversations. they will be with us in a week to look at what is going to be the scope, the structure and the design of the next universal agreement that they have actually committed to negotiating and agreeing to by the year 2015. as they do that, they're looking at all the other treaties that there are around the world to see what they can learn from the structure of the treaties that make sense, as well as using the basis as the the content of that agreement. what are countries doing on mitigation which is reduction of emissions. they're looking at the form and the content. >> michael: understood. what i love about this story is that it's a david and goliath story. tell me what made these nations realize they can't afford to

wait on action from the developed nations? >> well, the fact is all the least developed countries in particular the small island developing states have no historical responsibility for having put in the atmosphere the concentrations of greenhouse gases that lead to climate change. they have no present responsible and no future responsibility but they realize they are the most vulnerable. they're takeing a mobile leadership role. they're saying it does not matter what the size of the economy is, whether we be small or large we all have a moral responsibility to the next generation to do as much as we can. that's why they're moving forward. >> michael: let's take it to the united states. from your international perspective and.

>> i wouldn't call it inaction. i would call it inefficient action. i'm congratulating california for having moved forward with a cap and trade program inaugurated this year. california has already moved to pricing carbon, and toward all the different element steps on the way to reduce emissions to meet their own state level target. that is very commendable that california as a state is seeking the leadership role here in the united states. and the federal level, the federal government has regulated a little bit better the standards and what the standards have to be for any new power plants. having said that i think it is no secret that the world as a whole expects the united states to be a true leader on this, and the united states is not yet a

true leader. i have heard president obama's many statements particularly now in the last few months on climate change, and we're all hopeful that the u.s. government is moving forward with much more action on climate in the coming months and years. >> michael: it's encouraging that the world still looks to us to be the leader on an issue like this. you travel all over the world and you speak to different nations about combating climate change. in your opinion which country is doing it best, and what could the u.s. learn from them to take action to sufficiency? >> well, i would say that no country is doing as much as this could. no country is doing as much as it should. but there are very interesting examples. as you have mentioned i just came back a few weeks ago from a trip in the pacific visiting several islands.

several of those islands are already 100% generating. and the united emirates has a power planet with 100 megawatts despite the fact that the emirates are at the center of the gulf states and one of the largest of fossil fuel experters of the world. you see both small and large and you see examples of the countries coming forward. india just announced that the air around the taj mahal is so polluted that they're going to turn the whole city into a renewable energy city so the air clears up and they can protect the taj mahal. for many many reasons people are turning towards renewable energy. and as a corollary they're

contributing to climate change. >> michael: that's such interesting information, and it's nice to hear a conversation about climate change where there is encouraging use. we thank christiana coming to share that with us. >> michael: brett ehrlich is next. that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

[ ♪ music ♪ ] >> michael: it has, indeed been a rough week. senate republicans threw up a roadblock against stiffer gun background checks. a few minutes later fox news threw president obama off the air. it's all outrageous, but calm down because brett is finally

talking now. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> so the senate filibuster background checks for people who buy guns online and at gun shows. in response the president gave a stirring speech that was seen on both major networks live on its entirety and fox for 17 glorious ends. >> i think we have him right here. >> obama: a few months ago in response to too many tragedies including the shooting of an united states congresswoman gabby giffords, who is here today, and the murder of 20 innocent school children and their teachers, this country-- >> all right, is that what we're doing? all right, guys. >> they can get the rest on fox news.com. the rest of the statement is going to be streaming. >> enough of that. more like dana rapping about her dog. and at the end of the day those background checks were off the table even though only 10% of

americans oppose them. 10%. let's put that in perspective. at the end of his term president george w. bush had a higher approval rating. according to the american press university more people leave the sun resolves around the earth and more americans believe witches are real. i guess this is what body that represents less people than the people that they represent. they can get hopped up at 3:00 a.m. and go online to buy a gun. the same way i buy things like t 90 x. let's hope that they use their guns more often than i use p 90 x, which is to say never. i'm done talking now.

>> michael: brett erlich proving that it really does in the end help to be able to laugh. so thanks, brett. i don't have words that are sufficient in wrapping up this sad and confusing week. we saw the horror in boston, the tragedy in texas and the frustration of not being able to do right by gun victims. the most appropriate words to leave you with are those of eight-year-old martin richard who lost his life senselessly on monday. no more hurting people. peace, peace to all of you. have a great week, everybody. compelling true stories. music marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines. way inside. (christoff) we're patrolling the area looking for guns, drugs bodies ... (adam) we're going to places where few others are going. [lady] you have to get out now. >> lots of terrible things happen to people growing marijuana. >> this crop to me is my livelihood. >> i'm being violated by the

health care system. (christoff) we go and spend a considerable amount of time getting to know the people and the characters that are actually living these stories. (vo) from the underworld to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. >> occupy! >> we will have class warfare. (vo) true stories, current perspective. documentaries. on current tv. alright, in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

>> if you believe in state's rights but still support the drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think that there is any chance we'll see this president even say the words "carbon tax"? >> with an open mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned "great leadership" so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter). >> watch the show. >> only on current tv. you know who is coming on to me now? you know the kind of guys that do reverse mortgage commercials? those types are coming on to me all the time now. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely. >> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking?

[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] all right, welcome to the "the young turks." a huge show ahead and of course, the explosion in texas was there a problem with regulation? we'll talk about that. we'll talk about immigration the gun control bill and the filibuster, how they should have done the filibuster reform. they should have done it. but most of all we're about to show it to you. we've got the suspects. they're not in custody. we don't know their names. but we have their pictures, and we have their video. and we will discuss and debate what race are they? it's go time. [ ♪ music ♪ ] [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> we're releasing photos of these two suspects. we consider them to be armed and

extremely dangerous. they're identified as suspect one and suspect two. they appear to be associated. suspect two sat down a backpack at the site of the second explosion. these images should be the only one that the public should view to assist us. though it may be difficult the nation is counting on those with information to come forward and provide it to us. each piece moves us forward towards justice. the images from monday are indelible, and the horror of that day will remain with us forever. this further underscores our obligation to investigate this crime judiciously to bring those responsible to justice. >> cenk: obviously we're going to start with the images of the suspects that you saw there. the fbi has more on that. let's watch. >> the two suspects, after a very detailed analysis of photo video and other evidence we're releasing photos of these two suspects. they're identified as suspect

one and suspect two. they appear to be associated. suspect one is wearing a dark hat. suspect two is wearing a white hat. suspect two set down a backpack at the site of the second explosion just in front of the restaurant. >> cenk: all right, well i just keep staring into our monitors to try to see those pictures. i've been doing it for the last hour and a half. we'll discuss what race might be and what motivation might be. i don't know if that's kosher but we're going to do it any way. more from the fbi here. >> each piece moves us forward with justice. regarding the identities of suspect one suspect two and their location. we consider them to be armed and extremely dangerous. no one should approach them. no one should attempt to apprehend them except law enforcement. let me reiterate that caution. do not take any action on your

own. >> cenk: wow man, all right. let's just put up the pictures one at a time here. this is suspect one. he's the guy in the black hat. let's take a look right there. and you've got video of it, too. then you've got suspect two as well in the white hat. the baseball hat the whole point is to cover your face. suspect two not that bright. he put it on backwards so we can see his face lot more clearly than suspect one. i imagine suspect one is in the middle of yelling at suspect two. you're supposed to wear it forward. of course, what they did these are the videos before the bombing, and the result, unfortunately, was this.